DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Examiner acknowledges the amendments made to claims 1,6 and 13-15. New claims 16 and 17 have been added. Claims 3 and 11 stand as cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 06/15/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2,5 and 9 under 35 U.S.C. §102 and 4,6-8 and 12-15 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Ikuta (US 20150036711 A1).
Drawings
The previous rejection to the drawings has been withdrawn in light of the cancellation of claim 3.
Claim Objections
The previous objection to claim 15 has been withdrawn in light of the amendment made to claim 15.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The previous rejection of claims 6 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) have been withdrawn in light of the amendments made to claims 6 and 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1,2,5 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao et al. (hereinafter Qiao) (US 20210167580 A1) in view of Ikuta (US 20150036711 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Qiao discloses in Fig. 1,
A light emitting unit [10] (Para. 0038]) for emitting laser light at a laser wavelength (Para. [0038]), the light emitting unit [10] being arranged on a planar surface of a substrate [12] (Para. [0038]), wherein the light emitting unit [10] comprises:
a first reflective element [20] (Para. [0038]) configured to reflect light at the laser wavelength (Para. [0038]);
a gain element [22] (Para. [0038]) configured to amplify the light at the laser wavelength (Para. [0038]);
a second reflective element [26] (Para. [0038]) configured to partially reflect the light at the laser wavelength (Para. [0038]) (see light [30] emitting through upper surface Para. [0040]) and to emit the laser light [emits light 30] (Para. [0040]);
wherein the first reflective element [20], the gain element [22], and the second
reflective element [26] form a stack of layers [14] (Para. [0038]) integrated onto the planar surface of the substrate [12] (Para. [0038]), wherein each layer in the stack of layers [14] is parallel with the planar surface [top of 12] (see Fig. 1),
and wherein the gain element [22] is arranged between the first reflective element [20] and the second reflective element [26] (para. [0038]),
wherein the light emitting unit further comprises a beam shaping element [34] (Paras. [0040,0088,0089]) integrated with the stack of layers [14] on the substrate [12] (Para. [0040]), the beam shaping element [34] being configured to shape the laser light being emitted (Para. [0087]), wherein at least a part of the beam shaping element [34] is a separate element to the first reflective element [20] (Para. [0040]), the gain element [22] and the second reflective element [26] (Para. [0040]) or forms part of one or more of the first reflective element, the gain element and the second reflective element; and
wherein the beam shaping element [34] comprises a plurality of structures spaced apart in a direction of an extension of a layer of the beam shaping element [left and right direction Fig. 1] (see Figs. 7A-7C) (Para. [0068]) and wherein a size of the structures of the plurality of structures and/or a distance between adjacent structures [period Fig. 7C] (Para. [0068]) is smaller than the laser wavelength (subwavelength gratings Para. [0068]).
wherein the first reflective element [20] (Para. [0038]), the gain element [22] (Para. [0038]), the second reflective element [26] (Para. [0038]) and the beam shaping element [34] respectively, are arranged along an optical axis [middle of stack 14] (Para. [0038]) such that, and wherein the optical axis extends in a direction [extends vertically] (Para. [0040]) perpendicular to the planar surface of the substrate [12] (Para. [0040]).
Qiao fails to disclose,
a center of the first reflective element, the gain element, the second reflective element, and the beam shaping element respectively, does not deviate from the optical axis by more than 100 nm
Ikuta discloses in Fig. 1,
a center of a first reflective element [112] (Para. [0133]), a gain element [114] (Para. [0134]), a second reflective element [116] (Para. [0135]), and a beam shaping element [150] (Paras. [0147,0150]) centered on an optical axis [136] (Paras. [0142,0160])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the centering optical axis position as shown in Ikuta with the optical axis and elements of Qiao for the purpose of aligning a fundamental mode in the structure. (Ikuta Paras. [0142,0160])
Examiner notes the interpretation of “wherein at least a part of the beam shaping element is a separate element to the first reflective element, the gain element and the second reflective element or forms part of one or more of the first reflective element, the gain element and the second reflective element” for the purposes of examination in the instant application is understood to be “wherein at least a part of the beam shaping element is a separate element to the first reflective element, the gain element and the second reflective element” and,
the interpretation of “wherein a size of the structures of the plurality of structures and/or a distance between adjacent structures is smaller than the laser wavelength.” for the purposes of examination in the instant application is understood to be “wherein a distance between adjacent structures is smaller than the laser wavelength”
Regarding claim 2, Qiao in view of Ikuta discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses in Qiao Fig. 1,
wherein the second reflective element [26] (Para. [0039]) comprises a plurality of structures spaced apart in a direction of an extension of a layer of the second reflective element [26] (see Fig. 7C) (Para. [0068]) and wherein a size of the structures of the plurality of structures and/or a distance between adjacent structures is smaller than the laser wavelength (see Fig. 7C, subwavelength period) (Para. [0068]).
Examiner notes that paragraph [0039] of Qiao discloses that the upper reflector can use an HCG layer fully in place of the DBR.
Regarding claim 5, Qiao in view of Ikuta discloses the device outline din the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses in Qiao Fig. 1,
wherein the beam shaping element [34] (Para. [0040]) is a separate element (Para. [0040]) and wherein the beam shaping element [34] and the gain element [22] are arranged on opposite sides of the second reflective element [26] (Para. [0038]) (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 9, Qiao in view of Ikuta discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses in Qiao,
further comprising a first electrode [16] (Para. [0038]) and a second electrode [28] (Para. [0038]) integrated with the stack of layers [14] on the substrate [12], wherein the first electrode [16] and the second electrode [28] are arranged on opposite sides of the gain element [22] (Para. [0038]) in the stack of layers [14], and wherein the first electrode [16] and the second electrode [28] (Para. [0038]) are configured to generate a population inversion in the gain element [22] (Para. [0038]).
Examiner notes the interpretation of the term “integrated” for the purposes of examination of claim 9 in the instant application is understood to be “to incorporate into a larger unit” as defined in Merriam-Webster Dictionary (see PTO-892 form).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao in view of Ikuta as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Hori et al. (hereinafter Hori) (US 20070036189 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Qiao in view of Ikuta discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
further comprising a first spacer element arranged between the gain element and the second reflective element, the first spacer element being configured to provide a desired distance between the first reflective element and the second reflective element.
Hori discloses in Fig. 1,
a first spacer element [1030] (Para. [0041]) arranged between a gain element [1040] (Para. [0041]) and a second reflective element [1000] (Para. [0041]), the first spacer element [1030] (Para. [0041]) being configured to provide a desired distance between a first reflective element [1060] (Para. [0041]) and the second reflective element [1000] (Paras. [0041,0119])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement a first spacer element above the gain element of the modified device of Qiao for the purpose of adjusting the total thickness of the device. (Hori Para. [0119])
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao in view of Ikuta as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Ghosh et al. (hereinafter Ghosh) (US 20210194212 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Qiao in view of Ikuta discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 5 above but fails to disclose,
further comprising a second spacer element arranged between the second reflective element and the beam shaping element, the second spacer element being configured to provide a desired distance therebetween.
Ghosh discloses in Fig. 3,
a second spacer element [30] (Para. 0024]) arranged between a second reflective element [32] (Para. [0024]) and a beam shaping element [26] (Para. 0024]), the second spacer element [30] being configured to provide a desired distance therebetween (Para. 0022])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement a spacer between the second reflective element and the beam shaping element of the modified device of Qiao as shown in Ghosh for the purpose of adjusting the cavity size to match a phase of the wave condition for lasing operation. (Ghosh Para. [0022])
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao in view of Ikuta as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Walker et al. (hereinafter Walker) (US 6445495 B1).
Regarding claim 7, Qiao in view of Ikuta discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
a tunable element integrated with the stack of layers on the substrate, the tunable element being configured to provide tunability to the laser light.
Walker discloses in Fig. 3A,
a tunable element [312] (Col. 5, lines 16-28) integrated with a stack of layers [302] (Col.4 , lines 23-27) on a substrate (Col. 4, lines 53-57), the tunable element being configured to provide tunability to a laser light (Col. 5, lines 16-28)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the tunable element of Walker into the stack of layers of the modified device of Qiao for the purpose of tuning the value of the constant gain multiplier. (Walker Col. 5, lines 16-22)
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao in view of Ikuta as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Clark et al. (hereinafter Clark) (US 20190157834 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Qiao in view of Ikuta discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
wherein the substrate comprises Germanium.
Clark discloses in Fig. 1,
a substrate [102] comprising Germanium (Para. [0022])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the Germanium substrate of Clark as the substrate of the modified device of Qiao for the purpose of having improved mechanical strength. (Clark Para. [0022])
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao in view of Ikuta as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Schubert et al. (hereinafter Schubert) (US 9843160 B1), and further in view of Trezza (US 20060281309 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Qiao in view of Ikuta discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 9 above fails to disclose,
further comprising a first contact and a second contact, the first contact and the second contact extending through at least some of the layers in the stack, and being connected to the first electrode and the second electrode, respectively, wherein the first contact and the second contact 29enable electric control of the light emitting unit, and wherein at least one of the first contact and the second contact has a cross-sectional width of less than 1 pm.
Schubert discloses,
a first contact [Schubert 162 Fig. 1A] (Schubert Col. 3, line 61- Col. 4, line 8) and a second contact [Schubert 161 Fig. 1A] (Schubert Col. 3, line 61- Col. 4, line 8), being connected to the first electrode [Schubert 172 Fig. 1A] (Schubert Col. 3, line 61- Col. 4, line 8) and the second electrode [Schubert 170 Fig. 1A] (Schubert Col. 3, line 61- Col. 4, line 8), respectively, the second contact [Schubert 161 Fig. 1A] (Schubert Col. 3, line 61- Col. 4, line 8) extending through at least some of the layers [Shubert 120 Fig. 1A] (Schubert Col. 3, line 61- Col. 4, line 8) in the stack
wherein the first contact [Schubert 162 Fig. 1A] (Schubert Col. 3, line 61- Col. 4, line 8) and the second contact [Schubert 161 Fig. 1A] enable electric control of the light emitting unit (Schubert Col. 3, line 61- Col. 4, line 8)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the integrated electrode structure and contact structure shown in Schubert around the gain element of the modified device of Qiao for the purpose of allowing electrical connection to the electrode through intervening layers. (Schubert Col. 3, line 64-Col. 4, line 8)
Qiao in view of Ikuta and Schubert fails to disclose,
the first contact and the second contact extending through at least some of the layers in the stack
and wherein at least one of the first contact and the second contact has a cross-sectional width of less than 1 µm.
Trezza discloses in Fig. 28A,
a first contact [2802] (Para. [0188]) extending through at least a layer [122] (Para. [0138])
wherein the first contact [2802] (Para. [0188]) has a cross sectional width of less than 1µm (Para. [0296])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed inventio to implement the through via structure of Trezza in the modified device of Qiao for the purpose electrically connecting to an element through the layers in a highly controlled and precise manner. (Trezza Para. [0190])
Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao in view of Ikuta as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Liu et al. (hereinafter Liu) (US 7164702 B1).
Regarding claim 12, Qiao discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses in Qiao,
A light emitting device [70 Fig. 2B] (Para. [0045]) comprising:
a substrate [60] comprising a planar surface (Para. [0045]);
an array of light emitting units [10] (Para. [0045]) according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above),
Qiao fails to disclose,
the array of light emitting units being arranged on the planar surface of the substrate.
Liu discloses in Fig. 4,
an array [410] (Col. 4, lines 29 and 30) of light emitting units (Col. 4, lines 29 and 30) being arranged on a planar surface of a substrate [412] (Col. 4, lines 31-34) at a pitch of 125µm (Col. 5, lines 19 and 20)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the array structure on a common substrate at the pitch described in Joseph with the devices of the modified device of Qiao for the purpose of allowing flip chip bonding on a common substrate with high yield. (Col. 5, lines 36-49)
Regarding claim 13, Qiao in view of Ikuta and Liu as applied to claim 12 above further discloses in Liu,
wherein the array of light emitting units has a pitch of light emitting units of less than 1000 µm (Liu Col. 5, lines 19 and 20)
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao in view of Ikuta and Liu as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Burroughs et al. (hereinafter Burroughs) (US 20180301875 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Qiao in view of Ikuta and Liu discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 13 above but fails to disclose,
wherein the array of light emitting units has a pitch of light emitting units of less than 100 µm.
Burroughs discloses,
an array of light emitting units [200] with a pitch of 50µm (Para. [0067])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the pitch value as disclosed in Burroughs with the modified device of Qiao for the purpose of achieving closer spacings of the light emitting array. (Burroughs Para. [0067])
Regarding claim 17, Qiao in view of Ikuta, Liu and Burroughs discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 16 above and further discloses in Burroughs,
wherein the array of light emitting units has a pitch of light emitting units of less than 60 µm (Burroughs Para. [0067]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao in view of Ikuta and Pissis et al. (hereinafter Pissis) (US 20220158417 A1)
Regarding claim 14, Qiao discloses in Fig. 1,
A method for manufacturing a light emitting unit [10] (Para. 0038]) on a substrate [12] (Para. [0038]) comprising a planar surface (see Fig. 1), the light emitting unit [10] being configured for emitting laser light at a laser wavelength (Para. [0038]), the method comprising:
forming a first reflective element [20] (Para. [0038]) configured to reflect light at the laser wavelength (Para. [0038]);
forming a gain element [22] (Para. [0038]) by epitaxial deposition on the first reflective element [20] (Paras. [0038,0042]);
forming a second reflective element [26] (Para. [0038]) configured to emit the laser light [emits light 30] (Para. [0040]);
wherein the first reflective element [20], the gain element [22], and the second
reflective element [26] form a stack of layers [14] (Para. [0038]) integrated onto the planar surface of the substrate [12] (Para. [0038]), wherein each layer in the stack of layers [14] is parallel with the planar surface [top of 12] (see Fig. 1),
and wherein the gain element [22] is formed to be arranged between the first reflective element [20] and the second reflective element [26] (para. [0038]),
wherein the forming of the light emitting unit further comprises
forming a beam shaping element [34] (Paras. [0040,0088,0089]) integrated with the stack of layers [14] on the substrate [12] (Para. [0040]), the beam shaping element [34] being configured to shape the laser light being emitted (Para. [0087]), wherein at least a part of the beam shaping element [34] is a separate element to the first reflective element [20] (Para. [0040]), the gain element [22] and the second reflective element [26] (Para. [0040]) or forms part of one or more of the first reflective element, the gain element and the second reflective element; and
wherein the forming of the beam shaping element [34] involved forming a plurality of structures spaced apart in a direction of an extension of a layer of the beam shaping element [left and right direction Fig. 1] (see Figs. 7A-7C) (Para. [0068]) and wherein a size of the structures of the plurality of structures and/or a distance between adjacent structures [period Fig. 7C] (Para. [0068]) is smaller than the laser wavelength (subwavelength gratings Para. [0068]).
wherein the first reflective element [20] (Para. [0038]), the gain element [22] (Para. [0038]), the second reflective element [26] (Para. [0038]) and the beam shaping element [34] respectively, are arranged along an optical axis [middle of stack 14] (Para. [0038]) and wherein the optical axis extends in a direction [extends vertically] (Para. [0040]) perpendicular to the planar surface of the substrate [12] (Para. [0040]).
Qiao fails to disclose,
a center of the first reflective element, the gain element, the second reflective element, and the beam shaping element respectively, does not deviate from the optical axis by more than 100 nm
Ikuta discloses in Fig. 1,
a center of a first reflective element [112] (Para. [0133]), a gain element [114] (Para. [0134]), a second reflective element [116] (Para. [0135]), and a beam shaping element [150] (Paras. [0147,0150]) centered on an optical axis [136] (Paras. [0142,0160])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the centering optical axis position as shown in Ikuta with the optical axis and elements of Qiao for the purpose of aligning a fundamental mode in the structure. (Ikuta Paras. [0142,0160])
Qiao in view of Ikuta fails to disclose,
wherein the forming of the beam shaping element involves lithography
Pissis discloses in Fig. 4,
forming a grating feature using lithography [block 220 Fig. 4] (Para. [0101])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the use of a lithographic process shown discloses in Pissis for the formation of the grating of the modified method of Qiao for the purpose of allowing selective etching to a desired filling factor. (Pissis Para. [0101])
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao in view of Ikuta and Pissis as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of McLaurin (US 12191626 B1).
Regarding claim 15, Qiao in view of Ikuta and Pissis discloses the method outlined in the rejection of claim 14 above but fails to disclose,
wherein the substrate is a wafer having a width of at least 200 mm.
McLaurin discloses,
a wafer of a diameter of 200mm (Col. 19, lines 42-53)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the larger wafer size of McLaurin in the modified method of Qiao for the purpose of increasing the effective area of the device wafer and volume of manufacturing. (McLaurin Col. 19, lines 42-53)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNTER J NELSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5318. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:30am-5:00 ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, MinSun Harvey can be reached at (571) 272-1835. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/H.J.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2828
/TOD T VAN ROY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights